Opec States Owed Nothing

September 22, 2000

Reducing dependency on fossil fuels is key to battling the effects of global warming. That objective informed the Kyoto Protocol of 1997, requiring industrialized nations to cut their emissions of so-called greenhouse gases to 5.2 percent below the 1990 levels over the next decade. While difficult, the goal is hardly unrealistic.

Some scientists tracking climate change project that Earth's average temperature could rise by up to 6 degrees Fahrenheit over the next century if gas emissions are not reduced. The possible effects include harsher droughts and heat waves, rising sea levels and flooding, a wider spread of tropical diseases, the extinction of certain animal species and the destruction of ecosystems.

Although not all scientists subscribe to this doomsday scenario, most concede that there is need to slow the rate at which Earth's surface is heating up.

But there's been more squabbling than action. Many governments, the United States' included, signed the Kyoto treaty but have yet to ratify it. Some scientists and environmental activists have criticized the treaty for its lack of enforcement.

Sanctions make sense but appear unlikely. After several international parleys, many countries remain cold to the idea of punitive action.

The latest roadblock may come from the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries. At an international conference in Lyon, France, this month, OPEC members insisted that they be compensated for revenues they may lose when alternative sources of energy are fully developed. Otherwise, OPEC said, it will oppose the treaty.

The oil cartel's argument amounts to saying, ``We helped create this climatic mess and we want to be rewarded before anybody cleans it up.''

True, the income of OPEC members would be affected if alternatives to fossil fuel are developed. But such development is at least a decade away, and several oil producers already are diversifying their economies to prepare for the day when they will be unable to rely on a finite resource for their sustenance.

Rather than seek to undermine efforts to control global warming, OPEC governments ought to make plans to further reduce their dependence on oil revenues. The answer lies in fully diversifying their domestic economies.

Earnings from crude oil have provided a tremendous boon to oil-producing countries. Some, such as Nigeria and Venezuela, have frittered away much of their income in corrupt schemes or impractical investments. Others, like Iraq, have spent profligately on weapons.

Even so, oil has enabled several OPEC members to diversify their economies and improve their citizens' standards of living. It is no accident that Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Kuwait, for instance, have invested considerable sums of money in non-energy enterprises at home and abroad.

OPEC members ought to count their blessings and gird themselves for a future when oil is no longer the central energy resource.